Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Patch for disaster recovery

From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch for disaster recovery
Date: 2005-02-20 15:25:16
Message-ID: 20050220152516.GA23706@wolff.to (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 09:43:11 -0500,
  Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> 
> We regularly have people on IRC who delete data and then want to recover
> it.  By having the define it makes it easier for us to help them without
> them having to add actual C code.
> 
> Does that make sense?

You aren't going to get a consistant snapshot if you get back all of the
deleted rows. With autovacuum it is going to get harder to do this, because
accidentally making large changes in a table is going to trigger a vacuum.
It seems like the right way to do this is a recovery using the PITR
system and putting effort into making that easier is the way to go.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-02-20 18:08:14
Subject: Re: Patch for disaster recovery
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-02-20 15:00:21
Subject: Re: Patch for disaster recovery

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group